Ah yes, Prof. rrufff, again my "logic" or "language" was no good, eh? Luckily, I'm not alone, all other pro-peace posters in SI have got the same problem (the Pro-war people got no such problem) by your standard.
Exactly where my "logic" or "language" problem that caused a big misunderstanding?
Did You mean your word "I don't defend that(the WMDs story). Personally, I think it's good that Saddam was toppled..." actually meant the same thing as "I did condemn the WMDs lie."?
Or you mean even though WMDs was a lie but it was not a big lie? Even though you don't defend it, you should not condemn it?
And you meant Israelis did not push America to 'liberate' Iraq, and I was wrong to say so?
Or …?
Your clarification for the "logic" will be greatly appreciated.
(Your original words: I don't defend that. Unlike you, I don't take a party line.
Personally, I think it's good that Saddam was toppled. However, the incompetence and inefficiency in how it was handled will probably hurt us in the war against terror.
And my answer: So the WMDs big lie should not be condemned either!? Because Israel wanted the Americans to liberate the Iraqis, or?)
Have a nice (not bigoted) night, my friend rrufff. |
